MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023436279 · doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06047-9

Tibiofemoral subluxation in the coronal plane does not affect WOMAC and KOOS after total knee arthroplasty

2020· article· en· W3023436279 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehmet Özbey Büyükkuşçu, Abdülhamit Mısır, Akay Kırat, Kutalmış Albayrak, Kerem Sencan, Yalkın Çamurcu, Şükrü Sarper Gürsu

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubluxationCoronal planeMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisProsthesisArthroplastyRadiographyOrthodonticsTotal knee arthroplastySurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of preoperative coronal tibiofemoral subluxation (CTFS) on functional outcome, prosthesis type, insert thickness and revision rates in patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A total of 224 knees of 186 patients were included. Patients were divided into two groups as either with (Group 1, 114 knees of 86 patients) or without (Group 2, 124 knees of 100 patients) coronal lateral tibiofemoral subluxation. The mean follow-up period was 71.3 ± 7.3 (range 60-84) months in group 1 and 69.4 ± 6.6 (range 61-79) months in group 2 (n.s.). Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation degree was measured in degrees on standing anteroposterior knee radiographs. Group 1 was divided into three subgroups according to amount of subluxation (< 5 mm, 6-10 mm and > 10 mm). Functional outcome was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) preoperatively and at the last follow-up visit. Prosthesis type, insert thickness and revision rates were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding patient demographics, prosthesis type, and revision rates (n.s.). The insert thickness was found significantly higher in group 1 (p < 0.001). The preoperative and postoperative WOMAC and KOOS scores were found no significantly different between the two groups (n.s.). Among subluxation (+) subgroups, there was no significant difference in functional outcome scores and revision rates (n.s.). However, prosthesis type and insert thickness were significantly associated with the amount of subluxation (p = 0.009 and p = 0.001, respectively). There was no significant correlation between the degree of lower extremity deformity and coronal tibiofemoral amount of subluxation (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Preoperative CTFS does not adversely affect the WOMAC score, KOOS and revision rates after TKA. In the clinical practice, surgeons should be aware of the need for a posterior cruciate stabilizing prosthesis and a thicker insert in the presence of CTFS, especially with subluxation greater than 10 mm and to consider a spared bony resection on the tibia in patients suffering from CTFS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207